EPTHowever sadly Blizzard will never even consider changing it at this point. They're too in love with their own design. If they refuse to do anything new with the forcefield, and are adamant that they will not use the proposed economy, then they really have no intention of listening to the community at all, just like they haven't listened for 5 years.
Solving the Warpgate - Page 2
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
However sadly Blizzard will never even consider changing it at this point. They're too in love with their own design. If they refuse to do anything new with the forcefield, and are adamant that they will not use the proposed economy, then they really have no intention of listening to the community at all, just like they haven't listened for 5 years. | ||
|
SChlafmann
France725 Posts
On May 13 2015 00:31 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: I've always liked the idea of allowing a warp gate to produce normally like a gateway, and warp in as an option, but the warp in has a much longer cooldown OR costs more money. I think we can all agree that warping in should be a choice with pros and cons and not just a delayed tech. There is no way i agree with this  The only ok change i can see is lowering gateway production time so that it is faster than warpgate. But still dont change warpgate cooldown. | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2648 Posts
On May 12 2015 20:22 Salteador Neo wrote: If warpgate were to be removed and the units buffed, people would love it for the first couple days and then move on to complain about how strong gateway units are (dumb strong zealots, no skill a-move crap race) just like it happened in BW and with the Collossus. I for one like the warpgate tech. It makes the protoss race feel kinda unique even if the core units are weakened to compensate. If i wanted to play BW with SC2 graphics I'd play the Starbow mod. Unique =/= fun People complain about it because it creates bad game play, its just bad design all around. Since warpgate overrides so many of the core principles of RTS Blizzard has been putting band aids over band aids only because they are so adamant that WG is good design, it is not. WG due to the short production time and capacity to denegate defenders advantage makes it so protoss units have to be balanced around this, they can't be too strong or gateway all ins would be too strong, in response gateway units have to be weaker, but since having weaks units would mean protoss can't fight the other races blizzard gave them tools to "work around this", to name a few: FF: Since protoss gateway units are weak, they have a harder time fighting early game units, specially of zerg, so they are given the FF that allows to fight a bigger zerg army and gives them defenders capability. (creates awful gameplay, one of the spells with the least counter play, promotes turtle play) Colossus: To make these weak gateway units be capable of fighting the mid game armies of terran/zerg they are too reliant on AoE, these AoE units need to be strong enough to kill these armies but not too strong to be unbeteable. (promotes deathballs since colossus are very fragile, one of the most hard counter interactions of the game in viking/corruptor/viper vs colossus, colossus are considered bland and boring units to play and watch) PO: Since WG makes protoss units too strong on all ins they have to be toned down, this makes them bad in low numbers so they are given a spell to counter for this timing of weakness for protoss so that they can expand without too much risk, helps with the coin flip of PvP. (A one-fix-all spell, responsible for making many early aggression builds dissapear, not much micro too use and doesn't offers much counter play, makes playstyles too forgiving in the early game) Recall: Since the protoss gateway army is weak and thus dependant on robo units the protoss army becomes too vulnerable and slow so they give recall to allow protoss to move around the map (this makes protoss not be punished for bad positioning, another spell thats too forgiving) These are only a few of bad design moves that create bad game play. So for all the protoss players that keep talking about "OC too strong nerf that" or "protoss so weak why more nerf" or "just T whiners" This about desing and quality of game play. DESIGN AND QUALITY OF GAMEPLAY NOT BALANCE Its not aboud people dying to gatewall all ins or people talking about the power of protoss or anything like that, we are talking about how to make the game more enjoyable to watch and play, if 2/3 (wich is saying too little since protoss players also hate having weak gateway units and having to depend on colossus) think that it creates bad and frustrating games then it needs to be changed for the better of the game. It doesn't matter how balanced the game is if its design in a way that makes people not want to play it. PS: Just for the record I don't like OP changes nor do I think WG needs to be nerfed. | ||
|
linuxguru1
110 Posts
On May 13 2015 00:10 DinoMight wrote: You should spend some time thinking about whether an Orbital Command should produce SCVs slower than a naked CC or if a PF should only be able to have minerals delivered to it (and not gas). Because that's basically the same faulty logic. I was about to write this. Thank you  | ||
|
dust7
199 Posts
| ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
I'd rather have slightly longer production at the beginning and once we're past the proxy stage of the game, have faster cooldowns. | ||
|
Geiko
France1939 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:06 DinoMight wrote: As pointed out earlier, there is a reason that warpgate has a LOWER cooldown than gateway... it's because of proxy strategies... If naked gateways had a faster production time than warp gates it would buff proxy strategies, which to me is less interesting. I'd rather have slightly longer production at the beginning and once we're past the proxy stage of the game, have faster cooldowns. Make warpgate upgrade unlock warpgates AND faster build time for gateways | ||
|
Masayume
Netherlands208 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:14 Geiko wrote: Make warpgate upgrade unlock warpgates AND faster build time for gateways This would actually be a really interesting way to solve the problem. It actually opens up more options for Protoss strategically as well as economically speaking. If you can produce faster with Gateways, you would require less production buildings to have the same production capacity as you have now. Say 8 Gates producing is about equal to constant production from 6 Gates with this change. This means you still spend the maximum amount of resources in relatively the same time while needing to invest slightly less into production, but to forego warp ins for a while until you feel like it is strategically better or your timing is ready / enemy timing hits at multiple places. If you then make sure that the gateway focused buffs are baked into mid game upgrades you can completely avoid the 7/8 gate all-ins "being too strong" while still having staying power the moment you need to be mobile and taking expansions with basic units (coupled with upgrade investments). | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
Do Warpgates offer anything else to the game other than beeing a unique way for Protoss to macro? Short Answer is no! Warpgates are in every way superior to Gateways which leads to an entire production facility of Protoss not beeing used. It actually strengthens the macro capabilities of Protoss compared to the Gateways in addition of removing yet another defenders advantage (distance). It also destroyed the early game pace of Starcraft 2 by beeing this early available and the game had to be balanced around that. To compensate for a completely broken game mechanic, the Units you warp in as a protoss player are so weak, that they Protoss has to rely on Robo and Stargate units, which all are extremely powerful, just to stand a Chance in midgame and lategame. For Protoss on the other hand it creates defences anywhere instantly available and does not punish a Protoss player for beeing out of position. Blizzard addressed the last issue in LotV though to be fair. What has Starbow done? Starbow uses the concept of having Warpgate a lategame instead of an early game upgrade. As Counterpart, Gateway units can be much stronger. Downside for having the Warpgate in Starbow that you actually slow down your production in Exchange for outpositioning your Opponent (positions in a BW environement is much more important compared to SC2 where Protoss can just move anywhere freely on the map and is not punished generally for beeing out of position) and you cant warp in Dragoons in Starbow, which is pretty hefty. Nevertheless Warpin is still used in this game because you can still outposition your Opponent by using them. Personal Conclusion: Obviously it is far too late for the Starbow solution. The Early game and the way protoss works has been settled in Stone by now: A race which is dependant on allin or semi allin Timings with weak Gateway units that only win by abusing a game mechanic that is completely broken at its core or as an alternative relies on powerful robos/stargate tech units. Obviously Blizzard seems fine with this approach since they gave another strong unit to the robo and buffed the carrier into insanity instead of properly addressing a game-mechanic People complain about for 5 years now. People who came into RTS with Starcraft 2 probably defend also the Warpgate more, since they think warp-in is a race defining ability of Protoss (because Blizzard told them it would be so) But I would be happy if they left the Warp-gate as it is in HOTS and at least add a unit which you could only build from the Gateway. This unit could be very strong. Hell they even could just add the LOTV immortal to the gateway. I think that is a nice compromise. The Gateway units and their (imo) complete bs mechanic it relies on, which People like would remain but it also would offer protoss more diverse playstyle and it suddenly becomes incredibly more strategic by such a simple Change: -Do I want to begin with strong Gateway units (like the Immortal) and give up my aggressive potential early game? -Do I want to be agressive with Warpgates and later tech to higher Tier units? -Do I want to be agressive with warpgates and Switch back to gatway units? (like the Immortal) -Do I want strong units instead of instantly weak available ones? just my 2 cents | ||
|
Pino
1032 Posts
| ||
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
A few numbers could be balanced, but overall, that seems like the cleanest fix rather than trying to rework exactly how fast things build or doing awkward nexus leash ranges, etc. | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2648 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:37 SC2John wrote: I just read a post that I think is unbelievably brilliant in another thread. This idea has probably already been mentioned before, but I think the cleanest way to fix the gateway/warpgate problem is to just prevent certain types of units from being able to be warp in. In other words, only zealots, stalkers, adepts, and dark templar could be warped in, and sentries and high templar (lorewise, we'll assume they just have "too much psionic energy to be warped in") cannot. Everything could obviously still be built from gateways. A few numbers could be balanced, but overall, that seems like the cleanest fix rather than trying to rework exactly how fast things build or doing awkward nexus leash ranges, etc. People have been saying this since the dawn of time. I would actually like it if adepts couldn't be warped neither but they were stronger, maybe give them another upgrade so adept all ins are not so strong, range/damage maybe, I'm not sure what they would need. | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:37 SC2John wrote: I just read a post that I think is unbelievably brilliant in another thread. This idea has probably already been mentioned before, but I think the cleanest way to fix the gateway/warpgate problem is to just prevent certain types of units from being able to be warp in. In other words, only zealots, stalkers, adepts, and dark templar could be warped in, and sentries and high templar (lorewise, we'll assume they just have "too much psionic energy to be warped in") cannot. Everything could obviously still be built from gateways. A few numbers could be balanced, but overall, that seems like the cleanest fix rather than trying to rework exactly how fast things build or doing awkward nexus leash ranges, etc. I agree, its far too late to do any weird warpgate unit changes. The focus should be of rendering the gateway an alternative. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
I think the warpgate design is fine, and I think it's fine that Protoss early game units are a bit weaker. The race in general plays differently. For anyone who's played Magic the Gathering, Protoss is like playing Blue (and we all know everyone hates Blue players). It just plays differently. Because Blue doesn't just make a 5/5 Bear and walk over and attack you. Blue counters your spells, steals your creatures, and does other obnoxious things that can make someone who wants to just fight straight up really mad. I think it's fine to have weak gateway units offset by the ability to warp them in anywhere. It can lend itself to many styles (we we've seen.. everything from Rain to Parting to sOs). You can either play really defensively to high tech powerful units or you can play really aggressively to try and end the game quickly or set your opponent back enough to buy time. I'd be okay with the CURRENT Warpgate time and then ALSO faster regular gateway speed... who doesn't want a free buff? But the reality is that most people in this thread proposing changes simply don't like Warpgate as a concept and want to see it used less. I think that will reduce the diversity of play styles that we've seen. Personally I really enjoy watching creative Protoss players come up with new ways to use the technology. Let's allow for that? The same way that Terrans can pick up and float to a Gold base or swap addons etc. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:37 SC2John wrote: I just read a post that I think is unbelievably brilliant in another thread. This idea has probably already been mentioned before, but I think the cleanest way to fix the gateway/warpgate problem is to just prevent certain types of units from being able to be warp in. In other words, only zealots, stalkers, adepts, and dark templar could be warped in, and sentries and high templar (lorewise, we'll assume they just have "too much psionic energy to be warped in") cannot. Everything could obviously still be built from gateways. A few numbers could be balanced, but overall, that seems like the cleanest fix rather than trying to rework exactly how fast things build or doing awkward nexus leash ranges, etc. But like... why? What's the problem with warping in High Templar or Sentries? Moreover, you'dhave to keep switching from Gateways to Warpgates to make certain units which realistically would result in just more Gateways/Warpgates required overall out of convenience (also there is a change time). So all this is still a nerf. What is the buff you want to give? Do we get Amulet back ? :D | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:46 DinoMight wrote: I'd be okay with the CURRENT Warpgate time and then ALSO faster regular gateway speed... who doesn't want a free buff? But the reality is that most people in this thread proposing changes simply don't like Warpgate as a concept and want to see it used less. I think that will reduce the diversity of play styles that we've seen. But seeing Gatways from time to time , without changing how the warpgate works, wouldnt that allow for more instead less? Thats more diverse than: Warpgate superior in every way and no other style possible. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:52 404AlphaSquad wrote: But seeing Gatways from time to time , without changing how the warpgate works, wouldnt that allow for more instead less? Thats more diverse than: Warpgate superior in every way and no other style possible. Not really, because it only rewards one style... the style where you produce your stuff at home and stay there. Regular gateways are never going to promote aggressive styles because even if the cooldown is way shorter, the units still need to walk across the map and that will always take longer. Warpgate on the other hand gives you the flexibility to put the unit anywhere. | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2648 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:46 DinoMight wrote: Guys I think the warpgate design is fine, and I think it's fine that Protoss early game units are a bit weaker. The race in general plays differently. For anyone who's played Magic the Gathering, Protoss is like playing Blue (and we all know everyone hates Blue players). It just plays differently. Because Blue doesn't just make a 5/5 Bear and walk over and attack you. Blue counters your spells, steals your creatures, and does other obnoxious things that can make someone who wants to just fight straight up really mad. I think it's fine to have weak gateway units offset by the ability to warp them in anywhere. It can lend itself to many styles (we we've seen.. everything from Rain to Parting to sOs). You can either play really defensively to high tech powerful units or you can play really aggressively to try and end the game quickly or set your opponent back enough to buy time. I'd be okay with the CURRENT Warpgate time and then ALSO faster regular gateway speed... who doesn't want a free buff? But the reality is that most people in this thread proposing changes simply don't like Warpgate as a concept and want to see it used less. I think that will reduce the diversity of play styles that we've seen. Personally I really enjoy watching creative Protoss players come up with new ways to use the technology. Let's allow for that? The same way that Terrans can pick up and float to a Gold base or swap addons etc. That its exactly what everybody is trying to get to. You think protoss is a well designed race, the rest does not. At the very end its very obvious that there will be people that like protoss as it is, but its only a few, the biggest part of the player base has dislike it for what it is. At the very end its a matter of opinion, but it is what it is, the majority dislike it, including many protoss players, you are allowed to have your opinion as so we do, and none is more true than the other. Altough I doubt it would matter anyway, we all know blizzard won't change even if the whole community asks for it. | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:57 DinoMight wrote: Not really, because it only rewards one style... the style where you produce your stuff at home and stay there. Regular gateways are never going to promote aggressive styles because even if the cooldown is way shorter, the units still need to walk across the map and that will always take longer. Warpgate on the other hand gives you the flexibility to put the unit anywhere. That doesnt make any sense: Warpgates are not changed. You add another strong protoss unit to the gateway. (for example) How this removes diversity is beyond me because all you do is add another option for protoss. | ||
|
FrostedMiniWheats
United States30730 Posts
On May 13 2015 02:45 Lexender wrote: People have been saying this since the dawn of time. I would actually like it if adepts couldn't be warped neither but they were stronger, maybe give them another upgrade so adept all ins are not so strong, range/damage maybe, I'm not sure what they would need. I think splash damage is the key for the Adept and possibly for making them the linchpin gateway units need. However, there must be some sort of limitation on it while trying to avoid yet another spell/cooldown ability. They should be a move-and-shoot unit with the cool shade ability for escape/offense only. So the splash damage has to occur on the base attack with restrictions. I think the following could work: == - The third consecutive strike from the same adept on the same target triggers an aoe attack that only hits enemy units - Any 3 second interruption between the successive attacks restarts the sequence (micro back the unit to counter). - There would be a successive animation to indicate which unit it's on and how close it is to triggering (maybe the unit glows increasingly brighter or a growing concentric circle underneath the unit it's on) == So it's basically a combo attacking splash unit. Since it's 3 strikes, Adepts can be still effective worker killers, but their aoe can never trigger on workers (that aren't being healed) since they already 2-shot them. Adepts also 2-shot Zerglings and marines (up until combat shields and/or medivacs), however these units are usually clumped together with a sturdy armored unit (roaches and marauders) so there would still be opportunity to trigger the aoe on those nearby units. This also presents an interesting tradeoff of either utilizing the adept's insane damage vs. light or going for the aoe on targets that can withstand more than two hits. Or you could simply target your own stalkers/immortals in some scenarios (mass ling surround?). Having the combo sequence easily interrupted by micro could also lead to interesting engagements. The opponent has the opportunity to run the unit back, but the adept could also time the shade ability to appear behind said unit to complete the sequence. | ||
| ||
